Rules On Lawyer Ads Head To Court

TALLAHASSEE — When three Florida lawyers go to federal court next month to challenge the state's restrictions on their TV ads, lawyers across the country will be watching.

The Florida Bar rules severely restrict how the profession can market itself on TV and radio. No celebrities, dramatizations or music jingles can liven up a law firm's pitch.

Since the rules took effect in early 1991, 15 other states have adopted or proposed similar restrictions on lawyer advertising and many others are considering changes, according to the American Bar Association.

The review of the rules by a U.S. District Court judge in Tallahassee will help determine just how much states can restrict advertising by lawyers.

The three personal-injury lawyers suing the Bar - including Harry Jacobs, co-founder of Jacobs & Goodman P.A. in Altamonte Springs - said the restrictions violate their freedom of speech and prevent them from effectively selling their legal services to the public.

Before the ban, Jacobs & Goodman, one the nation's top TV advertisers, used former Orlando Magic basketball player Sam Vincent to promote itself.

Joining Jacobs in the suit are David Singer of Hollywood, Fla., and Richard Mulholland of Tampa, both heavy advertisers. Singer used dramatizations, including one in which a barber tells a young boy to stop squirming or he'll cut off his ear. The boy threatens to call Singer.

Singer said his ads performed a public service because they informed consumers in an entertaining fashion like any other TV commercial. The public was not clamoring for changes, he said, and few consumers complained about lawyer advertising.

The Bar's rules limit advertisements to ''name, rank and serial number,'' Singer said, in which lawyers can say what services they practice, explain a legal right, give their background and experience but little else. The rules prohibit celebrities, testimonials, jingles and more than one voice in an ad. Lawyers also are required lawyers to submit their ads to the Bar to determine if they comply.

The Bar prohibits lawyers from making false, misleading or deceptive claims about their practices. The restrictions ad- LAWYER, D-2

LAWYERD-1

dress advertising that could be considered ''inherently'' or ''potentially'' misleading such as testimonials and dramatizations.

U.S. District Court Chief Judge William Stafford is scheduled to conduct a trial in mid-October to decide whether the state Supreme Court has a ''substantial government interest'' in restricting lawyer advertising.

Whatever the outcome, an appeal is expected. Lawyers for both sides said the case eventually would end up before the federal Supreme Court.

The Bar says its rules prevent lawyers from misleading consumers and tarnishing the entire legal profession.

''The Bar is completely in favor of the free flow of accurate and non-misleading information to the public about legal services,'' said former state Supreme Court justice Alan Sundberg, who is representing the Bar. ''These rules are essentially about technique.''

The case is the biggest involving lawyer advertising since the U.S. Supreme Court decided in 1977 that outright bans on the practice violated the First Amendment.

Singer and other lawyers view their fight with the Bar as an economic one pitting aggressive lawyers against other traditional lawyers who consider advertising distasteful. Bruce Rogow, a First Amendment expert who represents the group, said he believed the Bar's self-image was a driving force behind the rules.

''They see themselves as upper-crust, silk-stocking citizens,'' said Rogow, of the Bar's leadership. ''They don't like the fact that others, at least in their eyes, practice another type of lawyering.''

Sundberg, representing the Bar, said it is trying to make sure the public is not deceived by unregulated lawyer advertising. Ads that feature sounds of car crashes, celebrity testimonials and other attention grabbers can confuse consumers about their chances of getting a settlement or jury award.

''It's all right to sell toothpaste that way if you want to,'' Sundberg said.

The Bar has used numerous surveys on lawyer advertising, conducted by itself and others, as evidence that the public has a negative image of lawyers trying to drum up business through the electronic media.

It said that prospective jurors may be prejudiced against lawyers who advertise and their clients, a theory that Singer calls ''ridiculous legal fiction.''

Rogow, a law professor at Nova University Law Center in Fort Lauderdale, and his clients said the Bar's surveys are unscientific and invalid. They use other surveys to counter the Bar's claims, including one from the ABA that showed most of the public finds lawyer advertising generally acceptable.

Restrictions in Florida and other states may blunt artistic creativity in TV and radio ads, but nationwide they haven't dampened the legal profession's enthusiasm for TV advertising.